Adi Da likes to knock cultism while simultaneously creating a monstrously bureaucratic cult about himself. Is Frank playing games? Is Frank in denial? Following are quotations and commentaries about the simultaneously hilarious and horrifying nature of the cult of Adidam.

The Appearance here, in human Form, of the Supreme Giver, Ruchira Avatar Adi Da Samraj, is a Revelation of the Divine that Surpasses anything that has ever been known. It is the Revelation of God Incarnate--Come to Bless and Awaken all beings in all realms to the All-Surpassing Truth and "Brightness" of the Divine Reality. Ruchira Avatar Adi Da is the Promised God-Man. His Coming is the Love-Response of the Divine, in Person, to eons of prayer and longing, on the part of beings everywhere, to be restored to the Heart of Real God.

The Appearance of the Ruchira Avatar, Adi Da Samraj, truly is the Great Event of history. It is the Event that Reveals the real meaning of the entire past, and the Great Purpose of all future time. His Avataric Incarnation is the fruition of an infinitely vast Divine Process, originating before time and space itself, and developing throughout the Cosmic domain in response to the desperate prayers of beings everywhere, suffering the pain of apparent separation from Real God. In that unspeakable sweep of time, there have been unique beings who, through great struggle and sacrifice, made "windows" to the Divine for others. They gave Teachings and practices, were worshiped and honored, and have become the source of the entire human tradition of religion and Spirituality. Again and again, it has seemed to those alive in a particular time and place that the revelation was complete, the salvation perfect, the enlightenment given.

Even so, there has remained a thread of prophecy in all the great Spiritual traditions foretelling One yet to Appear, One Who must Come in the darkest time of humanity, when the world is at its worst, and bring to completion all the revelations of the past. Christians await the second coming of Jesus; Moslems, the Mahdhi (the last prophet); Buddhists, Maitreya (the coming Buddha); and Hindus, the Kalki Avatar (the final Avatar of Vishnu). Even as recently as February 1939, a celebrated Indian Adept, Upasani Baba, prophesied the imminent appearance of a Western-born Avatar, who "will be all-powerful and bear down everything before Him."

After more than a quarter of a century of living in His Company, participating in His direct face-to-face Teaching Work with thousands of people, feeling the indescribable Transmission of Spirit-Force that Radiates from Him, and witnessing the limitless scope of His Divine Power to transform beings and conditions near and far, we, the devotees of Avatar Adi Da, freely profess our recognition that He is that All-Completing God-Man promised for the "dark" epoch--He is "the 'late-time' Avataric Revelation" of the Divine Person. Reading his books will enable you to make this supreme discovery for yourself.

FROM Apuguruji:

Anyone notice the spooky similarity between Adi Da and Brando's portrayal of Walter E. Kurtz in the movie "Apocalypse Now"?

I enjoy reading Da's books, but I get more from contemplating the photos of Jones/Bubba/Da, they speak to me of many things.

FROM Short Timer:

Pilgrim said: There are no "spies" here reporting back to some centralized "Big Brother." If anything, we have precious little organizing energy to spare even to keep track of our active, loyal membership.

This statement by Pilgrim made me remember a curious incident during my tenure in Adidam. Once I was assigned to moving some furniture. I was moving a filing cabinet, and one of the drawers slid open. My eyes fell on a file with my name on it!

It turned out the drawer was packed with files with the names of devotees on them. I took my own file out and opened it. It contained typed reports about me, describing everything that was known about me and describing my personality as it was viewed by the persons who had written the reports. The reports included summaries as to whether I was going to be a useful member of the community and whether I was a possible physical threat to the Master. Finally, at the bottom of the reports were "CC" marks indicating that copies of the report had gone to several different departments, including Master Da himself.

This is a true story, and I can prove it because I took the file and still have it in my possession.

We were never told that reports were being written, or files kept on us. Nor were we shown such reports, which would have been the decent thing to do. (You know, Freedom of Information Act and all that.)

And the contents of the reports were quite disturbing to read. I saw a quite distorted and prejudiced view of who I am. In thinking of this report, the word "fascistic" comes to mind.

FROM Free:

The community, church, fellowship, ashram, whatever it is, has been keeping records of various kinds on its devotees for years!

Haven't you ever heard about the archives? What do you think is stored in there? Just old tapes and talks? Not likely, my friend. Haven't you ever heard about the "Old Karma" project? Not only are there files, but they contain things like letters and cards sent to the guru, assessments of individual with potential to cause trouble. Back when I was doing it, there was a special section for "crazies". And there were devotees who's special function it was to check up on these people from time to time to make sure they weren't getting dangerous.

Some of these people were still practicing within the church, for crying out loud.

It may not be a fascist organization, but I can't stop short of calling it a paranoid organization. Like its founder. What a surprise.

...Records are kept, and always have been, of people that have not made threats. People have been classified, categorized, rated, if you will, into categories that include labels such as "crazy", "possible crazy", "angry", "dissident", etc. Most of these people never know they've been categorized or that they're getting different treatment because of it.

Believe me, Pilgrim, this is all done under a huge cloak of secrecy. There is a group of "trusted" devotees that has always done this job. It amazes me that the church fails to note how many of these people continue to leave and what secrets they take with them. It is a high stress position to find oneself in. Trusted, on the one hand, is an honor. It makes you feel close to the guru. It has the status of an "intimate" and all that conveys. On the other hand, it exposes you to the inner works of the paranoia machine. There is enough paranoia to challenge the practice of a saint. My faith didn't extend that far. There, I've said it.

Best to you,
Free

FROM Short Timer:

To Someone Considering Leaving Adidam,

In some sense you must have given up your judgement to the community. You are wanting to take it back, and that is being frowned upon. Sure you are "free to go", but not unless you can weather the storm of curses and spiritual threats that will follow you. As somebody said, "Frank has a way of making you doubt yourself."

I still remember a "higher up" in Adidam warning me that if I broke my vow and left the community "something might happen to you."

I asked him if he was threatening me. A bit flustered, he said "No of course not, but Adi Da has a way of making things happen to those who betray Him."

He meant, of course, that all Reality would turn against me. Now THAT'S a threat!

There is no freedom or love in Adidam. It is entirely a coercive gathering, where standard cultic practices of mind control are fully operational.

At best this "consideration" will reinforce your self doubt and re-sell the guru to you for awhile. At worst it will be like a Chinese water-torture or something. I was in such a "consideration" a few years ago with Adidam where I was mentally gang-banged by four people all talking at me in rapid succession and taunting me and asking me questions and then talking over my attempts to reply. To call what went down a "consideration" would be pure 1984 new speak. This went on for a couple of hours until they finally managed to convince me of one thing: Adidam is a cult and I had better get my ass out of there.

So yes, in my case, the "consideration" proved quite useful!

The attempts of some here to portray Frank's troubles as being like the persecution of Jesus are laughable. All his troubles were brought on himself, by his own sociopathic behavior toward his fellow humans. No ancient witnesses alleged that Jesus ordered his apostles to perform sexually before him, while he masturbated or received fellatio. I have spoken personally to a woman who was intimately involved with Frank on a number of such occasions. She is a close friend. She was not lying to me. It really happened.

Now perhaps, like Pilgrim, you can make yourself believe such behavior is somehow acceptable in a spiritual teacher or acceptable as a teaching demonstration by God Incarnate. Either that or you have to convince yourself it never happened.

But one option you have is to stay away from such teachers, even teachers who are alleged (but not proven) to have sexually abused their devotees.

Hope this helps you take hold of the courage of your own judgement in this matter.

FROM Elias:

Pilgrim,

You have to realize, he hasn't won my respect in the way he's won yours. And I don't buy the idea that I should tiptoe around you guys because you declare yourself an organized religion. It looks like a cult and smells like a cult. As a matter of fact, it is a cult, by every definition of the word. Even traditionally, guru-worship is a cultic form of religion.

Another thing, you say I can't really know the man because I haven't spent face-time with him like you have. ...Well, shut my mouth. Who has? And who will? If the books and tapes and witnessings and dreams and talking to devotees aren't enough to make a judgement about what's going on, then you guys might as well pack it in right now. (As you well know, the action and inter-action of the guru is completely independent of knowing him "personally". As Frank once said, "those who are closest to me physically usually know me the least.")

stay loose, o enlightened one
;-)

FROM Hereward:

There's something about the presentation of Da's work that seems to demand an either/or response. Either he's "God" or just a "guy". But really, what do we mean if we say he's "God" ? That word has a meaning for most westerners which is culturally conditioned. We have all been instilled to some degree with the Judeo-Christian concept of God, and when they call Da a "God-Man" they are inevitably triggering our (perhaps unconscious) projection of the "Occidental" monotheistic idea.

The "Occidental" way is more outer directed. The Oriental is more inner directed. The Occidental way requires "God" to exist out there in palpable form. The Oriental way says "Thou art that".

T'would seem that Da talks the talk of the non-dual Oriental way, yet walks the walk of the subject/object (I am God / You are mortal) Occidental way.

This seems quite different to his Indian counterparts and mentors. He presents himself in a specifically messianic way. He is here to "save the world". Did Ramana Marharshi do that ? Did Rama Krishna do that ? Did Muktananda do that ? I don't really know for sure. Can anyone clarify that ?

I reckon that retarded development in any aspect of psychological/emotional development must be a hindrance to spiritual insight and awakening. I don't see how you can transcend the ego if the ego has not consolidated and integrated itself. The typical unresolved ego is in a state where it is fragmented into contending complexes, some of which may be completely unconscious. One's awareness in such a state is severely restricted, and therefore one is not able to fully "surrender". One is not in full possession of oneself, so to speak.

I would suggest that the "openings" and "releases" that people describe in the process of Satsang with a Guru are the result of a perhaps temporary expansion of consciousness which allows them to transcend that limited perspective characteristic of the unresolved ego. Such openings also occur regularly in all kinds of therapy and from ingesting psycho-active drugs. But the problem with all of this is that the opening is temporary. Very quickly the person returns to their former state.

I really can't see however that this means the spiritual process is separate from the process of development along the bio-physical / emotional-sexual / psychological trajectory. It is a continuum. And a prerequisite for a stable realization of the Witness position (for example) is surely a balanced and "centered" self awareness, wherein the "shadow" has been integrated and one's emotional response is unblocked.

What do you think of that?

Hereward.

FROM Dan Lee:

FWIW, I can tell you quite specifically what sets off my alarms: proponents of any spiritual path are generally Right in what they Affirm, and Wrong in what they Deny.

Put another way, we are generally Right in statements directed inward, or toward systems we affirm, and Wrong in statements directed outward, toward systems we may not affirm.

When we affirm the value of a particular path, we are generally right. When we deny the validity of other paths, we are almost always wrong. Comments about ourselves: Right; about others: Wrong.

This is how my bullshit detector works. I'm generally very interested in learning about systems whose proponents consider that system to be one-of-many valid perspectives. All of us would probably agree that the best way to examine a topic is to look at it from many different angles. But when a system appears to claim exclusiveness, such that its proponents feel free to analyze the point of view of others as wrong or misguided or egotistical or whatever, that immediately activates that B.S. detector algorithm described above.

My field is psychology, and that field has been just as guilty of this kind of behavior as any other. But what I *like* about psych is that most psychologists these days are what is referred to as "eclectic psychologists." This is, they understand and use therapies from a wide variety of viewpoints. Nowadays, individuals who make exclusive claims about behaviorism or neo-Freudianism or Jungian analysis or whatever are not going to find much support, since (as clearly pointed out by Wilber and widely acknowledged by the psychological community) different *classes* of problems demand different *classes* (or perspectives, or viewpoints) of therapy.

The same is true for spiritual beliefs, systems, or world views. Some of the comments made by Adi Da proponents sound to me to be very insightful and interesting. But when statements about others' egos or motives or levels of development creep in, the detector goes off: how in hell would *you* know whether any other individual on this forum can or cannot attain some high level of spiritual growth or personal enlightenment? It is those kinds of statements that set off alarms.

Certainly you will object when *your* world view comes under attack, as seems to happen frequently on this forum. Usually, however, attacks on (or objections to) affirming statements are NOT directed at the affirmation part of the statement, but at any part of the statement that appears to make exclusiveness claims, or implies a denial of the validity of other paths.

Unfortunately for the Adi Da proponents, so much of that kind of stuff has gone back and forth on this forum that any hope the proponents of this world view have of being understood at this point seems futile.

FWIW...
Dan

FROM Geoffrey:

Pilgrim,

Whether you are "wasting your time" on the this forum depends on what your purposes are in spending time here. If it is to win over converts to Adi Da, you probably are wasting your time. As for your book offer, I have already read Da Free John and listened to one of his lectures. I read Scientific Proof . . . some years back, and other essays by Da, and have to say I was pretty impressed with his insight and profundity.

I have long thought that Da Free John experienced enlightenment, satori, or moksha -- however one wants to call that transcendent awareness of oneness with All That Is. But over the years I have witnessed various gurus whom I admired suffer "falls" wherein I realized that men who I once thought were enlightened and incapable of power tripping or being greedy or just making major mistakes did in fact appear to do all of those.

Then there was Georg Feuerstein's book, Holy Madness. He, as you probably know, was a follower of Da Free John before he wrote that book. In the book he describes his growing disenchantment with Da's increasing "self mythologization." Feuerstein also goes into some of Da's "crazy wise" antics during the infamous "garbage and goddess" period -- including Da's sleeping with devotees' wives.

For a lot of very good reasons, I have come to reject the whole notion of "crazy wise" teachers, i.e., the notion that a teacher, by virtue of his level of enlightenment, need not abide by certain ethical parameters. One problem with the whole idea of the "crazy-wise" teacher is that Da can claim to embody anyone or anything, engage in any sort of ethical gyration at all, and, regardless of disciples' reactions, Da can simply claim his action was motivated as "another teaching." He thus places himself in a position where he is utterly immune from any ethical judgement.

Even a man who was jerked around by Da, who'd had his wife slept with by Da and was subjected to an emotional roller coaster ride (recounted by Feuerstein) was somehow able to convince himself this was a "teaching event," -- and well it might have been -- but he wonders, as an ironic afterthought, if he could have learned the same thing from life itself. Life itself can be constantly counted on to teach us the futility of our egoic models and expectations; I don't need a guru to rub it in by partying with me and my wife and then sleeping with her.

I'm sorry, I don't find any justification for that. If you want to rationalize away everything he does, no matter how unethical or egregious, that's your business. As for the First Last and Only business, I find it incredible. I am admittedly not privy to all the various stages of ultimate enlightenment, only just struggling to attain to the Centaurian level myself, but I am distrustful of anyone who claims to be more enlightened than the Buddha. Why? Well, because our age is one of unmitigated decadence.

But even if such a teacher came along, why would he need to state that he is the most advanced guru in this or any age? And hasn't Da simply invented the stages which he claims to be the most transcended exemplar of? And how, specifically, is one to verify his claims about these matters which are so far from most everyone's experience? You can verify his teachings by seeing how they work in your life. But how can you verify whether he is abiding in a level of consciousness higher than Buddha abided in?

Also, I agree with Wilber: if he is a World Teacher, why doesn't he go out and engage the World? The world is in desperate need of enlightened teachers.

I recommend you read Feuerstein's book (New York: Penguin, 1990). He has a whole chapter on Da Free John. He appears very balanced, is still very sympathetic with Da Free John and claims to have learned a lot from him, but has his criticisms as well.

Geoffrey

FROM Hereward:

About ten years ago I had some dealings with the Free Daist people here in Sydney. Da was talking of coming to Australia (never made it), and I was interested in the possibility of seeing him.

I had a long talk with a Daist by the name of Godfree, or Peter - a very intelligent Englishman who was I guess part of Da's "inner circle". Anyway, I told him that I was a bit put off by the hyperbole and mythologizing going on around Da - and he agreed. He said that Da is definitely a "man", not "God". But a man nonetheless who had realized the ultimate potential of humanness. But he definitely did not buy into the idea (which seems to be the bedrock of present-day Daism) that Da was "God" in the concrete sense.

He was about the only person I met whose presentation of Da was compatible with my own intuitive response.

Anyway, I wonder what happened to him, whether he changed his view about that, or left Da... I don't think he was much liked by others in the community...

My intuitive feeling about Da is exactly as Allan Watts put it... he knows what "It's" all about.

To me however, this does not imply that he is something other than, or more than, human. This is the one key "meta-pattern" which rings false to me. This is so especially because I know that deifying an "other " is psycho-spiritually an excuse for a refusal to grow, to expand beyond the knot of our own egos and realize our own divinity. And in saying that I'm not trashing the Guru-function per se, I'm trying rather to refine and clarify my own understanding of it. If the Guru-function were nothing more than childish projection and idolatry then I would be happy to be rid of it. I do feel there's more to it than that, but I must use every inch of my discriminative ability to weed out the childish, deluded elements which seem to adhere to the real-life guru phenomenon. Da claims to be doing the same with his own community. He claims to disavow cultism, says he won't be "the man in the middle" etc. Yet at the same time he promotes himself as GOD in a very concrete sense, which can only engender a cultic response (I mean how the hell else do you relate to a walking archetype????).

Well Jim, I dunno... maybe the trick is in realizing (you and me) that "I Am" = God, and therefore everything is permitted (because there is inherently no obstruction). Then we can each call ourselves "Da" or "Ma" or "Bum-Ananda" if we want, without worrying about who is authentic and who is not!

best wishes,
Hereward.

FROM Hereward:

There's an argument going on here about spiritual paths, centering around the big old dilemma of conditional existence. It's one of those arguments that's been going on for thousands of years. It is an apparent conflict between surrender and actualization, the Subject and the Object, the inner guiding principle and the necessity for sacrifice.

The Daists claim to have resolved this dilemma for all time. They claim there has been an avataric incarnation on earth in the form of Adi Da which inherently embraces and transcends both horns of this dilemma. (The strategies associated with each side of the dilemma have been labeled by Da as "Alpha" and "Omega") It's one hell of a claim, and anyone who doesn't see that and isn't intrigued by it has not progressed very far in their own journey of self inquiry (I won't bother with the IMO's - you know its me talking!) Adi Da's teaching is closely acquainted with these fundamental dilemmas of human consciousness, and if you recognize the eternal nature of the issues he discusses then you can't not be affected by him. Da's teaching arguments are not unique, you can find parts of what he says in many other traditions. But he is unique in the way he pulls it all together. At the very least we can see a formidable intellect at work.

The gripe that the anti-Da league has is not so much with Da's claim of resolving the subject/object dilemma, but the "only by Me" and "for all time" aspect of it. This is because it implies a demand on each of us who recognize that dilemma and the validity of his teaching argument to submit ourselves to become bodily worshippers of Da, surrendering up our entire lives to Him.

And anyone who can't see why that gets people a little hot under the collar hasn't looked into this whole debate very deeply I suggest! A power trip is still a power trip even if its sugar coated with nectar of immortality.

The Anti-Daists contend that Da's cult is a grotesque, grandiose travesty of the real guru-devotee process. They claim it exploits the power and control aspects of such a relationship in the service of Da's megalomania. The Daists merely point to the fact that "God" can do whatever he likes without making him any less "God".

The curious thing is that this apparent conflict is the same old subject/object dilemma in a new guise.

The Daists implicitly argue that if you recognize the truth of Da's argument relative to consciousness, yet reject the requirement to worship Da as the living "God" (including all aspects of practice as set down by Da), then you are being led by your narcissistic tendencies, you are not yet "ready" for real sadhana, etc., etc... What they are saying, in effect, is you can only trust your intuition in so far as it leads you to do exactly what Da says. If it leads you to reject parts of Da's (very demanding) practice then it's just delusion. (Correct me if I'm wrong, please).

The anti-Daists, in rejecting the demand to submit to Da (as Transcendental Object) are affirming themselves (as Transcendental Subject), and so the dilemma is re-born. It has clearly not been transcended. Of course, the Daists claim that's just "Narcissus at work", but in doing so they are clinging to one side (or "horn") of the total non-dual reality (or "dilemma") while we "heretics" occupy and defend the other.

I think we have in this forum till now only scratched the surface of this problem. So I hope the debate and "consideration" goes on.

best wishes to everyone,
Hereward.